Jump to content

Lyanna and Rhaegar.


Recommended Posts

Stop spreading incorrect information. Lyanna was not 13 when she was supposedly abducted, that shouldn't be so difficult to remember.

We don't know her exact age when she was abducted. We could settle for 14 and she was still a child. But my post was not about age as much as it was about Rheagar being a married man and kidnapping.

The official story fourteen years later cannot be used to establish what Rickard knew or believed, and what he wold have told Brandon depended if communication was possible in the first place, allowed by time span and/or distance. Strawmen, really.

I presented plenty of evidence that starks and rest of the westeros thinks that Rheagar kidnaped. What makes you think that Rickard knew otherwise? We literally have nothing from his mind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know her exact age when she was abducted. We could settle for 14 and she was still a child. But my post was not about age as much as it was about Rheagar being a married man and kidnapping.

We know she died when 16 and she disappeared for almost a year, how could she be 14? She was at least 15.

Your pedo Rhaegar claim is not working. You should try with the unsullied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you find it tedious then please don't reply to me.

The problem is that poeple who don't know take your misinformation as truth, then form more tediously impossible theories from it.

It is a strawman from your end. Don't you think Rickard would have told his son and his family that lyanna went willingly. Why there is no mention of it then? And the offical stark story is that Rheagar kidnapped Lyanna (thanks to bran's stroy)

The official story fourteen years later cannot be used to establish what Rickard knew or believed, and what he wold have told Brandon depended if communication was possible in the first place, allowed by time span and/or distance. Strawmen, really.

Indeed. Not to mention that Bran's information is known to be unreliable. He knows what someone told him, and Neither Ned nor Luwin contradict him, because its just better for everybody that way.

I've been thinking about who believed what as well.

As far as we know:

*Someone* told Brandon that Lyanna had been taken by Prince Rhaegar.

Agreed, more or less.

News probably travels from Riverun (Rikkard and Hoster) to the Vale (Arryn, Robert, Ned).

So at this point, the Starks don't know much about where Lyanna may or maynot be.

Probably.

Robert begins seething.

No evidence for this at all.

Brandon challenges Rhaegar at KL.

Still no one knows anything about Lyanna. By the time the war is in full swing, not another person laid eyes on them.

Then it was over. After all is said and done, no one can admit that they don't actually know what happened.

Indeed. Lyanna and Rhaegar is obviously the catalyst for Brandon's idiocy, but we have no idea what he knew, or thought he knew, how he got that information, or who from.

Lyanna is never mentioned again.

And from the moment Brandon demanded the crown prince come out and die (not even demanded a duel, nor mentioned why, nor mentioned his sister, just a group of armed men ride up to the gates and demand that the crown prince comes out and dies, according to an eye-witness who despises both parties equally), Lyanna became irrelevant.

Brandon's offence carries a death sentence, and Aerys is paranoid and cruel enough to escalate matters impossibly from there.

Yet, When Aerys becomes concerned about the rebellion he sends out Gerold Hightower to bring Rhaegar back to KL.

That means Gerold had enough time, between the BotB and the Trident, to find Rhaegar and Rhaegar to return back to KL. Was Aerys in contact with Rhaegar the whole time or did Gerold just search a few places for him.

Earlier, when Brandon did his bit, Aerys wanted Rhaegar but no one knew where he was.

Between BotB and the Trident is many months - 6-9 at best guess, so there is plenty of time for Hightower to do a bit of detective work first (like, say, go to Starfall and see if he can track down Arthur Dayne...)

"Aerys Targaryen's last Hand was killed in the Sack of King's Landing, although he had been appointed only a fortnight earlier. The Hand before him had burned to death. The two before them had died landless and penniless in exile. Lord Tywin Lannister was the last Hand of the King to depart King's Landing safely (II: 41)"

So it took Gerold Hightower around two weeks to find Rhaegar and send him to King's Landing. Considering how quickly they returned it seems to indicate that they knew where Rhaegar was hiding. Maybe some communication between the two?

No, you misunderstand. There are a succession of Hands, and its only the very last that was appointed 2 weeks before the sack. That has nothing to do with Hightower finding Rhaegar. Rhaegar was probably back at KL reorganising and taking military command for some weeks to a month before setting out for the Trident, so that last Hand was probably apointed after Rhaegar had returned.

We don't know her exact age when she was abducted. We could settle for 14 and she was still a child. But my post was not about age as much as it was about Rheagar being a married man and kidnapping.

We don't know exactly, but we have lots of clues to pin it down closer than that. She was 16 when she died, and the war lasted about a year, so she was 15 when abducted, give or take a month or so.

More importantly, she was not a child. In context, women bleed, children don't. Period. Anything else is inappropriately mislabelling due to an inability to understand that this is not your world, culture and time.

I presented plenty of evidence that starks and rest of the westeros thinks that Rheagar kidnaped. What makes you think that Rickard knew otherwise? We literally have nothing from his mind

Thats flat bullshit. The only evidence you presented was what Bran says, and he's known to be misinformed, and does not represent all of westeros. Thats neither 'plenty' of evidence, nor even a singular good piece of evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know she died when 16 and she disappeared for almost a year, how could she be 14? She was at least 15.

Your pedo Rhaegar claim is not working. You should try with the unsullied.

Well back then, or rather the time period this is based off of, a girl was considered a woman when she menstruated(gross). So in Westerosi standards he wasn't a pedo he was a deadbeat cheating husband :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That depends on whether Elia knew or not, but I'm inclined to agree.

Nope. If he married her first, then it wasn't cheating. Elai's knowledge, or lack therefore, doesn't figure into the equation at all. This isn't mohammedism where the first wife has to agree (IIRC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. If he married her first, then it wasn't cheating. Elai's knowledge, or lack therefore, doesn't figure into the equation at all. This isn't mohammedism where the first wife has to agree (IIRC).

That may be the case or not, but marrying another without Elia's consent would still be a betrayal of her. Not as big as some out here seem to make it; Aegon would still come before any child of Lyanna in the LoS, so the position of Elia and Dorne, in general, wouln't change much (just with Lyanna's child(ren) ahead of Viserys, something noone should disagree on).

However, since Dany's HotU vision seems to confirm at least Elia's knowledge of the general situation ("There must be one more."), I think Elia did not disagree with Rhaegar except perhaps for some formal protest. The two never were in love after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Romeo and Juliet is half right. The other half is a married man with kids responsible for a kingdom.

Some debate whether or not Lyanna was kidnapped. Make no mistake, she was kidnapped by any understanding in Westeros. Even if she jumped on the back of Rhaegar's horse, stuck a knife to his back, and demanded he take her away, it was a kidnapping. She was the maiden daughter of a Lord Paramount, betrothed to the heir of another Lord Paramount. Marriage between the nobility is 2 parts politics, 1 part economic, and a tiny seed of love that may grow in time or die in the ground.

Of course, it wasn't the kidnapping that started the war, it was the crisis that Aerys's insanity failed to deal with. If it wasn't Lyanna, it would have been an Iron Islands Rebellion, a war in the Reach, or a King's Landing Riot. Some thing would have happened and Aerys would have made an inferno out of it.

Rhaegar knew he was insulting both house Stark and House Baratheon, but insults themselves are not causi belli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in all, since Lyanna was a woman and had no say in anything regarding her life and future, as is basically treated like a thing that would be exchanged for alliances, even if she wanted to run away it doesn't matter. Rhaegar took THE THING that would belong to someone else so he is a kidnapper/thief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in all, since Lyanna was a woman and had no say in anything regarding her life and future, as is basically treated like a thing that would be exchanged for alliances, even if she wanted to run away it doesn't matter. Rhaegar took THE THING that would belong to someone else so he is a kidnapper/thief.

You have a very good understanding of the legal condition of teenage girls up until very recent times...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err, no it did not. The war started because Brandon Stark did something insane. No one even mentioned Lyanna Stark. Rickard Stark came south to defend his son, still no one mentioned Lyanna. Aerys judicially murdered Brandon and Rickard in a particualrly cruel way, then demanded the heads of Robert Baratheon and Ned Stark, for no reason. Jon Arryn said bugger this for a game of marbles and raised his banners in rebellion. Ned and Robert joined him, as the alternative is to deliver their heads to Aerys.

As you acknowledge yourself, Rhaegar and Lyanna's behaviour may have been a catalyst for Brandon's later actions - remember I said, "contributed to the war" not "caused the war".

In name, why not. His marraige to Elia was a political one forced on him by his father, and while there was affection there, there was no love. Elia cannot have any more children so there is no reason to sleep with her any more. Setting Elia aside creates political issues and possible succession issues that are simply unnecessary, and he also wants three heads of the dragon, so why set aside the two heads he already has? It just makes no sense at all to set her aside when he has this handy precedent that makes everything work out for everybody.

Perhaps. It may make sense from a bigamist's perspective, but I'm not sure that there is enough evidence in the story at this point in time to state that everyone would have been fine with this arrangement. As headstrong as she is, would Lyanna be happy with this arrangement and would Dorne feel just a little that their noses had been put out of joint, politically speaking? It is surely a possibility and I don't think we can completely discount the possibility that he meant to cast Elia aside. Although I don't necessarily think it would create succession issues, we probably wouldn't be giving any other character the time of day, if he was the heir to the throne, married with kids, and then suddenly ran off with another woman - irrespective of whether she chose to go with him or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case or not, but marrying another without Elia's consent would still be a betrayal of her. Not as big as some out here seem to make it; Aegon would still come before any child of Lyanna in the LoS, so the position of Elia and Dorne, in general, wouln't change much (just with Lyanna's child(ren) ahead of Viserys, something noone should disagree on).

However, since Dany's HotU vision seems to confirm at least Elia's knowledge of the general situation ("There must be one more."), I think Elia did not disagree with Rhaegar except perhaps for some formal protest. The two never were in love after all.

Would it be seen as a betrayal to Elia? In Westeros, the men seem to decide what they're going to do and do it there doesn't seem to be very much "considering my wife's feelings" involved. Are we apply "real world" values to Westeros?

If Rhaegar decided he needed another wife, he'll take one. Why would he have to consider her feelings about it? Polygamy is legal. The marriage to both women would be legal. The order of succession hasn't changed just because he married someone new. The oldest would still be first in line.

Why would it damage her honor or be a betrayal to Elia? If Elia is no longer capable of having children, getting a second wife that can seems perfectly understandable. It's not a failing on Elia's part. She had two children but can no longer have more. Rhaegar is still young and wants more children. Where's the hurt to her honor? Why is not talking to Elia about a decision that, in Westeros, wouldn't have been "discussed" a betrayal? n

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case or not, but marrying another without Elia's consent would still be a betrayal of her. Not as big as some out here seem to make it; Aegon would still come before any child of Lyanna in the LoS, so the position of Elia and Dorne, in general, wouln't change much (just with Lyanna's child(ren) ahead of Viserys, something noone should disagree on).

However, since Dany's HotU vision seems to confirm at least Elia's knowledge of the general situation ("There must be one more."), I think Elia did not disagree with Rhaegar except perhaps for some formal protest. The two never were in love after all.

Sorry quoted the wrong person!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be seen as a betrayal to Elia? In Westeros, the men seem to decide what they're going to do and do it there doesn't seem to be very much "considering my wife's feelings" involved. Are we apply "real world" values to Westeros?

If Rhaegar decided he needed another wife, he'll take one. Why would he have to consider her feelings about it? Polygamy is legal. The marriage to both women would be legal. The order of succession hasn't changed just because he married someone new. The oldest would still be first in line.

Why would it damage her honor or be a betrayal to Elia? If Elia is no longer capable of having children, getting a second wife that can seems perfectly understandable. It's not a failing on Elia's part. She had two children but can no longer have more. Rhaegar is still young and wants more children. Where's the hurt to her honor? Why is not talking to Elia about a decision that, in Westeros, wouldn't have been "discussed" a betrayal? n

I support the fact that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married but I'm sorry the problem Elia would have with it is that Rhaegar would be fucking another woman. He likely would have spent most of his time with Lyanna and likely never gone near her in any form of sexual way again. Even though they did not love each other it would still be very insulting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the fact that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married but I'm sorry the problem Elia would have with it is that Rhaegar would be fucking another woman. He likely would have spent most of his time with Lyanna and likely never gone near her in any form of sexual way again. Even though they did not love each other it would still be very insulting.

Yes, well, we know Lyanna would be his favorite wife

And I agree he would totally put Elia to the side. It could get complicated, especially with the Martells

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the fact that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married but I'm sorry the problem Elia would have with it is that Rhaegar would be fucking another woman. He likely would have spent most of his time with Lyanna and likely never gone near her in any form of sexual way again. Even though they did not love each other it would still be very insulting.

It's honestly a lot easier to handle multiple sex partners than many people think.

Sex with person A + sex with person B = 2Sex (A+B )

Sex with person A + sex with person B /= Sex/(A+B )

When there's a will there's a way. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's honestly a lot easier to handle multiple sex partners than many people think.

Sex with person A + sex with person B = 2Sex (A+B )

Sex with person A + sex with person B /= Sex/(A+B )

When there's a will there's a way. LOL

Not to mention the fact that even with the existence of moon tea, Elia probably would have avoided sex seeing as getting pregnant again could kill her. I know I wouldn't take the risk in her shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...